Book•
EQS : structural equations program manual
01 Jan 1989-
About: The article was published on 1989-01-01 and is currently open access. It has received 9143 citations till now.
Citations
More filters
TL;DR: In this article, the adequacy of the conventional cutoff criteria and several new alternatives for various fit indexes used to evaluate model fit in practice were examined, and the results suggest that, for the ML method, a cutoff value close to.95 for TLI, BL89, CFI, RNI, and G...
Abstract: This article examines the adequacy of the “rules of thumb” conventional cutoff criteria and several new alternatives for various fit indexes used to evaluate model fit in practice. Using a 2‐index presentation strategy, which includes using the maximum likelihood (ML)‐based standardized root mean squared residual (SRMR) and supplementing it with either Tucker‐Lewis Index (TLI), Bollen's (1989) Fit Index (BL89), Relative Noncentrality Index (RNI), Comparative Fit Index (CFI), Gamma Hat, McDonald's Centrality Index (Mc), or root mean squared error of approximation (RMSEA), various combinations of cutoff values from selected ranges of cutoff criteria for the ML‐based SRMR and a given supplemental fit index were used to calculate rejection rates for various types of true‐population and misspecified models; that is, models with misspecified factor covariance(s) and models with misspecified factor loading(s). The results suggest that, for the ML method, a cutoff value close to .95 for TLI, BL89, CFI, RNI, and G...
76,383 citations
TL;DR: A new coefficient is proposed to summarize the relative reduction in the noncentrality parameters of two nested models and two estimators of the coefficient yield new normed (CFI) and nonnormed (FI) fit indexes.
Abstract: Normed and nonnormed fit indexes are frequently used as adjuncts to chi-square statistics for evaluating the fit of a structural model A drawback of existing indexes is that they estimate no known population parameters A new coefficient is proposed to summarize the relative reduction in the noncentrality parameters of two nested models Two estimators of the coefficient yield new normed (CFI) and nonnormed (FI) fit indexes CFI avoids the underestimation of fit often noted in small samples for Bentler and Bonett's (1980) normed fit index (NFI) FI is a linear function of Bentler and Bonett's non-normed fit index (NNFI) that avoids the extreme underestimation and overestimation often found in NNFI Asymptotically, CFI, FI, NFI, and a new index developed by Bollen are equivalent measures of comparative fit, whereas NNFI measures relative fit by comparing noncentrality per degree of freedom All of the indexes are generalized to permit use of Wald and Lagrange multiplier statistics An example illustrates the behavior of these indexes under conditions of correct specification and misspecification The new fit indexes perform very well at all sample sizes
21,588 citations
Cites methods from "EQS : structural equations program ..."
...They are routinely available in a public computer program (Bentler, 1986, 1989) and are typically applied to compare nested submodels....
[...]
TL;DR: 2 general approaches that come highly recommended: maximum likelihood (ML) and Bayesian multiple imputation (MI) are presented and may eventually extend the ML and MI methods that currently represent the state of the art.
Abstract: Statistical procedures for missing data have vastly improved, yet misconception and unsound practice still abound. The authors frame the missing-data problem, review methods, offer advice, and raise issues that remain unresolved. They clear up common misunderstandings regarding the missing at random (MAR) concept. They summarize the evidence against older procedures and, with few exceptions, discourage their use. They present, in both technical and practical language, 2 general approaches that come highly recommended: maximum likelihood (ML) and Bayesian multiple imputation (MI). Newer developments are discussed, including some for dealing with missing data that are not MAR. Although not yet in the mainstream, these procedures may eventually extend the ML and MI methods that currently represent the state of the art.
10,568 citations
Cites background from "EQS : structural equations program ..."
...The producers of EQS (Bentler, inpress) have also announced plans for a new version withmissing-data capabilities, but as of this writing it has not yetbeen released....
[...]
TL;DR: In this article, the sensitivity of maximum likelihood (ML), generalized least squares (GLS), and asymptotic distribution-free (ADF)-based fit indices to model misspecification, under conditions that varied sample size and distribution.
Abstract: This study evaluated the sensitivity of maximum likelihood (ML)-, generalized least squares (GLS)-, and asymptotic distribution-free (ADF)-based fit indices to model misspecification, under conditions that varied sample size and distribution. The effect of violating assumptions of asymptotic robustness theory also was examined. Standardized root-mean-square residual (SRMR) was the most sensitive index to models with misspecified factor covariance(s), and Tucker-Lewis Index (1973; TLI), Bollen's fit index (1989; BL89), relative noncentrality index (RNI), comparative fit index (CFI), and the MLand GLS-based gamma hat, McDonald's centrality index (1989; Me), and root-mean-square error of approximation (RMSEA) were the most sensitive indices to models with misspecified factor loadings. With ML and GLS methods, we recommend the use of SRMR, supplemented by TLI, BL89, RNI, CFI, gamma hat, Me, or RMSEA (TLI, Me, and RMSEA are less preferable at small sample sizes). With the ADF method, we recommend the use of SRMR, supplemented by TLI, BL89, RNI, or CFI. Finally, most of the ML-based fit indices outperformed those obtained from GLS and ADF and are preferable for evaluating model fit.
9,249 citations
Cites methods from "EQS : structural equations program ..."
...These include the goodness-of-fit (GFI) and adjusted-GFI (AGFI) indices (Bentler, 1983; Joreskog & Sorbom, 1984; Tanaka & Huba, 1985); Steiger's (1989) gamma hat; a rescaled version of Akaike's information criterion (CAK; Cudeck & Browne, 1983); a cross-validation index (CK; Browne & Cudeck, 1989); McDonald's (1989) centrality index (Me); Hoelter's (1983) critical N (CN); a standardized version of Joreskog and Sorbom's (1981) root-meansquare residual (SRMR; Bentler, 1995); and the RMSEA (Steiger & Lind, 1980)....
[...]
Book•
01 Jan 2006TL;DR: In this article, the authors present a detailed, worked-through example drawn from psychology, management, and sociology studies illustrate the procedures, pitfalls, and extensions of CFA methodology.
Abstract: "With its emphasis on practical and conceptual aspects, rather than mathematics or formulas, this accessible book has established itself as the go-to resource on confirmatory factor analysis (CFA). Detailed, worked-through examples drawn from psychology, management, and sociology studies illustrate the procedures, pitfalls, and extensions of CFA methodology. The text shows how to formulate, program, and interpret CFA models using popular latent variable software packages (LISREL, Mplus, EQS, SAS/CALIS); understand the similarities and differences between CFA and exploratory factor analysis (EFA); and report results from a CFA study. It is filled with useful advice and tables that outline the procedures. The companion website offers data and program syntax files for most of the research examples, as well as links to CFA-related resources. New to This Edition *Updated throughout to incorporate important developments in latent variable modeling. *Chapter on Bayesian CFA and multilevel measurement models. *Addresses new topics (with examples): exploratory structural equation modeling, bifactor analysis, measurement invariance evaluation with categorical indicators, and a new method for scaling latent variables. *Utilizes the latest versions of major latent variable software packages"--
7,620 citations
Cites methods from "EQS : structural equations program ..."
...Thus, in the case of non-normal, continuous indicators, it is better to use a different estimator, such as ML with robust standard errors and χ2 (MLM; Bentler, 1995)....
[...]
...The two most commonly used estimators for non-normal continuous data are (1) robust ML (Bentler, 1995; Satorra & Bentler, 1994); and (2) weighted least squares (WLS; Browne, 1984b)....
[...]